A bombshell report on Thursday, filled with detailed allegations of sexual harassment and abuse involving famous actresses such as Ashley Judd and Rose McGowan, as well as a half dozen former employees, have forced Weinstein to temporarily step down from the company he runs. If previous scandals involving Bill Cosby, Bill O’Reilly and Roger Ailes are any indication, this will be the first of many damaging articles about Weinstein’s misbehavior. Such stories tend to have a dam-bursting impact, jarring loose stories of misbehavior and emboldening women to come forward publicly with fresh allegations.

There’s something different about the Weinstein case. Unlike Ailes or O’Reilly, he is not part of a public company, thus he is not subject to the same pressure points. He reports to a (largely hand-picked) board and is his own boss. It’s possible that these board members or his brother and company co-founder Bob Weinstein may pressure him to part ways. But Weinstein stopped short of saying he would step down in a bizarre and rambling statement to the Times, in which he quoted Jay-Z and hit out at Donald Trump and the NRA. He did not mount much of a defense, though his lawyer Charles Harder says he is preparing a lawsuit against the paper.

Rather, his ostracization will likely come from the creative community. Will Netflix want to buy shows from the Weinstein Co. if is still at the helm? Will Michael Moore and other liberal filmmakers want their projects appearing under the Weinstein Co. banner? Will the CAAs and WMEs of the world remain willing to let their clients place projects with the indie company?

His other problems will involve financing. It seems unlikely that a major investment firm will feel comfortable signing up for another round of backing with Weinstein. There’s not much of a company without him, and right now his brand is toxic.

Hollywood is a relationship business and the movie business’ tendrils spread out in thousands of different directions. Many prominent names will have trouble distancing themselves from a worsening Weinstein story. As the Times story makes clear, Weinstein’s alleged history of abuse dates back 30 years, extending to his days running Miramax, the Oscar-winning studio behind “Shakespeare in Love” and “Pulp Fiction.” At the time, Miramax was owned by Disney.

How much did executives at the company know about Weinstein’s behavior? Did they do enough to safeguard their employees or are they complicit in creating a toxic workplace environment? Was Disney’s money used to pay off Weinstein’s accusers? Spokespeople for the studio did not immediately respond to a request for comment. But these stories have a way of leaving everyone dirty.

In truth, the noose has been tightening for years around Harvey Weinstein. There’s been a bunker-like mentality at the Weinstein Co. for years, as the indie studio’s money troubles have worsened and as it tried to migrate away from prestige fare and into television. There were too many film flops such as and persistent mutterings that the company could no longer pay its bills. High profile executives would leave, with positions remaining vacant or filled by junior staffers. It’s been a while since the studio was a major force at film festivals, swinging its checkbook around to nab the hottest Sundance titles. In the meantime, new players like A24 and Bleecker Street have emerged, establishing themselves as more auteur-friendly (Weinstein had a reputation for battling directors), while Amazon and Netflix have been able to outspend all comers.

Even before the reports broke, agents were already wary about working with Weinstein because of reports that its money was running out. One agent told Variety that the Times’ report will give them an even bigger reason to stay away from the studio.

In some respects, Thursday’s piece was the confirmation of decades of rumors and shop talk that have clung to Weinstein. At various times, the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times and the New Yorker (which has its own competing piece still set to launch) have tried to break this story. They’ve aggressively pursued the angle of whether or not Weinstein used corporate funds at Miramax to pay for legal settlements with women. In most cases, Weinstein was able to successfully hit back at those claims. Another stumbling block was that many women did not want to go on the record with their allegations. That will likely change with the Times piece.

Weinstein is a fighter, a screamer, and a bully. He’s paying big money to top lawyers and is on the hunt for public relations firms in search of advocates. He’s probably not going to go quietly and his attorneys will be pitbulls. But in the court of public opinion, the jury may already be out. Threats may not be enough this time.

For an industry that produces an endless amount of moral police celebrities, who feel they have the platform to inform everybody of what social and political issues they should care about, they sure do produce a great amount of sexual predators, pedophiles, racists, and rapists.

This also reminds me of the recent fuck up by AMC for bringing back Mr. Pee-beard, Devin Faraci, amidst rape allegations.

This is the reason why people cringed with Meryl Streep's speech against Trump.
A club of millionaire sexual predators acting like a moral authority or something.
There are truly talented people in american cinema but Hollywood as a term and as a club has mostly negative output.

This is the reason why people cringed with Meryl Streep's speech against Trump.
A club of millionaire sexual predators acting like a moral authority or something.
There are truly talented people in american cinema but Hollywood as a term and as a club has mostly negative output.

Click to expand...

You're saying that as if Hollywood is a literal gang of sexual predators which isn't true. Furthermore you're using that fallacious argument to brush off her criticism if Trump like it isn't valid.

You're saying that as if Hollywood is a literal gang of sexual predators which isn't true. Furthermore you're using that fallacious argument to brush off her criticism if Trump like it isn't valid.

Click to expand...

Well Meryl sure tried to portray Hollywood as a diverse wonderland helping the world while she has no idea of middle class and poor's people struggle. Her argument was invalid because like I said a club of millionaires has no moral authority to portray itself as a human rights fighter when it often rewards alleged pedos and cocaine addicts.
It would be better if true sociopolitical activists made their criticisms instead of a club of diverse self entitled douchebags.

I think you both have points. Hollywood obviously isn't a club of sexual predators, but they can be very hypocritical about it. Everyone snubbed Casey Affleck because of what he may have done, but Roman Polanski was cheered (convicted predator who fled the country) when "The Pianist" (I think?) won its Oscar.

When I was in my screen-writing class, Polanski was detained in Switzerland and I was appalled when my Teacher and some of my fellow students argued he should be released 'because he makes good films'. Hollywood should not be any kind of moral authority, but it should be noted that they're comprised of human beings who can f@ck up royally. I was disgusted with how many conservatives and Christians supported Donald Trump, who usually embodies everything they despise. But they share the same platform right now, so will make excuses for his shortcomings. Hollywood can be just as bad. It's human nature.

that whole polanski situation is fucking messed up and till this day i still simply can't wrap my head around it. this human filth drugged, raped and sodomized a 13 year old girl and then like the cowardly human filth he is fled the country to avoid prosecution and yet somehow this pedophile rapist got an oscar afterward and continued support from the likes of martin scorsese and half of hollywood not to mention numerous french politicians??

HE'S A PEDOPHILE RAPIST

this shit legitimately gets me mad. guys like him deserve the death penalty.

that whole polanski situation is fucking messed up and till this day i still simply can't wrap my head around it. this human filth drugged, raped and sodomized a 13 year old girl and then like the cowardly human filth he is fled the country to avoid prosecution and yet somehow this pedophile rapist got an oscar afterward and continued support from the likes of martin scorsese and half of hollywood not to mention numerous french politicians??

HE'S A PEDOPHILE RAPIST

this shit legitimately gets me mad. guys like him deserve the death penalty.

For an industry that produces an endless amount of moral police celebrities, who feel they have the platform to inform everybody of what social and political issues they should care about, they sure do produce a great amount of sexual predators, pedophiles, racists, and rapists.

This also reminds me of the recent fuck up by AMC for bringing back Mr. Pee-beard, Devin Faraci, amidst rape allegations.

Click to expand...

This!

As someone already said here, they are people just like everyone else; which is exactly why they should STFU with their holier then thou bullshit.
No one is perfect and that includes them, they may in fact be worse seeing how a lot of them knew Weinstein was doing shit like this yet didn't speak out against him.

Wait, what did he do? I assumed it was something terrible from the gossip, but was he just a sleazy Hollywood guy who hit on the women he cast, groped one or two..? I hate to say 'just', but I assume most producers in Hollywood do this. Did this.

Still not as bad as the old guard music industry slamming underaged groupie tail at every concert, but what's exactly making Harvey a pariah? I bet you money dicaprio has banged some drunk 16 year old on his boat sometime in the last two years. It's Hollywood. The entertainment industry in general seems pretty wild.

Wiki

Members

Support

If you need help, you can contact any staff member to provide you with insight either by private messaging or leaving a message directly on their profile page. More information on the forum software can be found here.